Nicolas Ghesquière - Designer, Creative Director of Louis Vuitton

[Kanzai]

Chill! It’s just social media and these designers are just glorified clothes-makers at best. U don’t need them to teach you how to enjoy your life and vice versa.

 

[Lola701]

Out of curiosity, why do you think most designers act like boomers / kiddos on IG? You have Vaccarello posting stories of his son with face covered by heart emoji like a middle aged Karen, Ghesquiere commenting posts related to his life with a bunch of emoji like a teenager or stating in a post how much he loves his partner and their dogs. Seriously, they are billionaires and live a life completely detached to reality, shaping the taste and culture of the ultra wealthy, yet they act like the most basic people in the world. Adding to the bunch also Walter Chiapponi throwing a tantrum at a random designer appointment every other day and Frida Giannini bashing Lallo's Gucci tenure...but at least those two are funny to follow. What about Blazy getting officially appointed as Chanel new creative director while still having his Bottega bio description visible on his account? I would also consider that Bottega design director guy who left Bottega to join Blazy by posting a farewell and thank you post on IG and then changing his IG bio to "CHANEL DESIGN STUDIO CEO" 12 hours later.
I can't believe these people are running such high profile jobs...

Maybe because they are boomers who uses social media in a very casual way and in France and Italy, IG is still used a bit in a more casual way, differently to the US or UK where there’s more control about it.

And I don’t agree with the idea of « detached to reality ». It’s not automatic. You can be very rich and not necessarily live a terribly lavish lifestyle. Of course you are part of the 1% so your lifestyle is not common to the majority of the society but when they have a pretty balanced life, designers are not as disconnected as one could imagine. And it’s also another generation.
And the entourage also plays a lot in the equation.

And the nonchalance you associate with them can be seen in many people from the industry. People still uses social media in the most casual way. But someone like Nicolas even cleared his IG. He used to be more casual about it, post things from his personal life, his car and all. He has made a slight effort…

But you would be very surprised to see how normal, particularly some of those designers are irl. Even some of the very party-goer who always look like they are coming from an after party are quite normal. Pharrell is living a much more glamorous life than Nicolas.

 

[yslforever]

Those designers aren't superhuman, they are mere human like us and sometimes just want to post their children (with hidden faces) because they are just happy with them, for friends too. And they do have normal, non-rich, non-fashion, friends. And family.

 

[style_expert]

Those designers aren't superhuman, they are mere human like us and sometimes just want to post their children (with hidden faces) because they are just happy with them, for friends too. And they do have normal, non-rich, non-fashion, friends. And family.

Of course, they could choose to have have private, non-public Instagram accounts for that - without millions of followers.

I find it refreshing not to know much—if anything—about designers’ private lives. Some brands seem to expect designers to be public personas on social media, but that rarely results in anything interesting or remotely stimulating.

When I think about Nadège or Véronique at Hermès, I appreciate that they’re shielded from that sphere. Honestly, I don’t want to know much more about them beyond their work.
In the end, I believe the luxury industry would benefit from a bit more mystery and subtlety in this age of oversaturation.

 

[PDFSD]

Of course, they could choose to have have private, non-public Instagram accounts for that - without millions of followers.

I find it refreshing not to know much—if anything—about designers’ private lives. Some brands seem to expect designers to be public personas on social media, but that rarely results in anything interesting or remotely stimulating.

When I think about Nadège or Véronique at Hermès, I appreciate that they’re shielded from that sphere. Honestly, I don’t want to know much more about them beyond their work.
In the end, I believe the luxury industry would benefit from a bit more mystery and subtlety in this age of oversaturation.

Nadège or Véronique at Hermès you don't want to know who they are lol IRL one is very neurotic french Karin vibez lol ...and the tortured over design tells you enough lol

IG like Wealth is just an magnifying glass of an person's persona (if you was greedy or basic/tacky when you were poor it will only show more evidently as you get richer or have more eyes on you )

also to be on social media to then act demure or mysterious is an oxymoron in itself. like a hollywood star giving his or her address littlery to the public but wants to be left in privat as people show up to have a peek inside the house or garden.

being on social media is cringe you can't escape it its both ugly and can be used for good.

Designers on IG are boring. to be online with your known name can only mean you want to be known or else create a more secret name and just connect with your circle in private mode.

 

[tourbillions]

they post how they wish cause if they have a well controlled feed like jacquemus, the fashion girlies will have something bad to say. And if they post casually, they also have something bad to say.

 

[PDFSD]

they post how they wish cause if they have a well controlled feed like jacquemus, the fashion girlies will have something bad to say. And if they post casually, they also have something bad to say.

i think it has more to do with its seen as having a curated feed as bit on the tacky side showing allot or give it to much energy, as part of high fashion and luxury is having mystic & privacy and not take exposing oneself to seriously as a side job or mission.

what people don't know they can't destroy
to lead a private life is to have a rich one
etc tec

then again having a personal brand and some online presence is also valuable asset for IRL ventures
the personal brand economy is only growing , people look to online people they can trust or look upto or align with etc

 

[Creative]

I would not call Nicolas lazy… He’s a sum of his experiences and interests. Who gives a sh*t. He reworks everything into a new context to mean something else. Anyone who cares about him already knows what he’s into and doesn’t have to be surprised if he offers a remix of something obviously classic. He’s not just sitting in a dark room doing LSD coming up with ideas out of thin air.

I agree… I love that way of designing to be honest. It’s pretty much how Phoebe and JW design too… I love research and there are some nice pieces that if you rework them, add a little bit, remove a little bit, exaggerate, reduce… you can give them a new mood and it can be super interesting.

If it’s literally the same, I agree it’s a tad lazy, especially if the designer is not famous and still working, but when there’s a rework with something from the past, I find it interesting tbh.

That particular dress inspired by the 20s costume I find it ugly, but I don’t think it’s a copy… at all. I think it’s super NG. I remember how he reworked a Givenchy finishing from the 80s in one of his collections from 2012… I was in love, felt completely different from the Givenchy one even if it was a copy. The context was different and the result felt so so different and modern.

One of my fav pieces from Nico is the militar trench coat Raquel wore in a 2006 show… and I found something super similar in a magazine from the 70s… it was obvious he took that as a reference, but I saw it for the first time though his eyes and the purity, the freshness, the rigidity of the show… it really means something else though his eyes. I think we all are a mix of things we like the most, we all have references… sometimes you are reading a Wilde book and you keep a sentence that you will repeat in the future, but it’s probably not the same sentence lola or pdfg would choose… or the same in photography… I think the M&M versions of Newton are still M&M , or the way Meisel copied (literally) Penn was still Meisel… idk.

I think the key is having a strong personality and I think Nicolas does . He is also genuine and has passions. In people like that I don’t really believe in copies. In people like SDS, for instance, who is insipid, it is another thing .

 

[PDFSD]

That particular dress inspired by the 20s costume is a copy even if the material is upgraded he tends to not change historical comes much.

NG way of working is assemblage and at times he falls in love with a piece and does not change it so much other than fabrication or alt versions of it .

he is brilliant but he does have 1:1 copy moments, prada as well phoebe as well tom as well , this does not take away from there total vision unlike a ancora that just rifs of the latest miu miu and prada with no vision.

marc is much more open with his obsessions tom as well, where as NG tends to play wizard of OZ this part i like less of his way of dealing with his process ,and why you never seen also a documentary of his way of creating because its lots of pieces from all designers or pictures put in a blender.

i can tell you from my friend that work in his LV design office and seeing the process a few times and methods of working.
the studio is full of vintage designers liek all the others he just cuts part up and remix more via a sci fi lens retro future look.
one of his old balenciaga collection i found out but felt new was the one that actually came from one of the interns study on packaging which then got mixed in with other stuff.

often the audience is just not in the know of the multi references so it feels like its out of this world.

(instead of becoming more sharper with age and more bold and know when to restrain )
for me NG lost the plot his designs are now plan ugly over designed cosplay for a outdated sci fi movie never made and ego driven, i hope he changes course but i doubt it. (instead of becoming more sharper and more bold and know when to retrain )

its like the 70´s or 60´s idea of the future its looks comical now in 2025

 

[Creative]

(instead of becoming more sharper with age and more bold and know when to restrain )
for me NG lost the plot his designs are now plan ugly over designed cosplay for a outdated sci fi movie never made and ego driven, i hope he changes course but i doubt it. (instead of becoming more sharper and more bold and know when to retrain )

its like the 70´s or 60´s idea of the future its looks comical now in 20

I totally agree with this, but I don’t have a big problem with his design process. I actually enjoy it. I feel I’d approach design in a similar way. I feel the result is much richer.

It’s true sometimes it’s too literal, but if there’s a transforming process I have nothing against it.

 

[KilltheLook]

I truly think fashion had done it all. Everything is a remade of something.

I don't have a problem with NG and Phoebe Philo because they know how to turn the references into their own creations. Even when it's an exact copy (Phoebe's Geoffrey Beene's coat), it's believable because the rest of the collection reinforced her vision and gave it a strong personal identity.

 

[Phuel]

This was so fire!!! Need more contents like this from him.

View attachment 1400716

WTF?!?!? …I take it he means he felt hurt by their “dishonesty”. …But he really could mean exactly that he won’t tolerate “honesty”, since the industry nowadays absolutely does despise “honesty” LMFAO

 

[hamburgers]

Random bit of history from Patrick van Ommeslaeghe's interview with Eugene Rabkin: he was the one who hired Nicolas to replace him designing the Japanese funeral license at Balenciaga (ironically he was leaving to work for Nicolas' former employer JPG) and then Nicolas replaced Thimister 3 months later after the FW97 debacle.



Some fun tidbits of history in there including the fact that originally Margiela wanted to work for Armani, but didn't want to relocate to Milan so he want to Paris to JPG.

 

[Lola701]

Random bit of history from Patrick van Ommeslaeghe's interview with Eugene Rabkin: he was the one who hired Nicolas to replace him designing the Japanese funeral license at Balenciaga (ironically he was leaving to work for Nicolas' former employer JPG) and then Nicolas replaced Thimister 3 months later after the FW97 debacle.



Some fun tidbits of history in there including the fact that originally Margiela wanted to work for Armani, but didn't want to relocate to Milan so he want to Paris to JPG.

There’s something very lackluster about Eugene’s questions but hey..
The best part was probably the JS debacle, particularly with the couple. I would have talked a little bit more about the JS years under Prada and the succession of owners.

What I find interesting about Gaultier is that the designers who worked under him were all vaccinated to the idea of fame as a designer and being part of the show business. He was indeed very exposed.

Patrick is so talented that I can see him with PPP at Balenciaga or Tom Ford with Haider.

I don’t know if he ever dreamed of being a CD. Maybe for brands like Akris, Tods, that are slightly more mature. Anyway, his absence in RAF’s universe was noticeable.

 

[jeanclaude]

For me changing things in an old garment to make it look "fresh" or "modern" is not design. It is just plain customization.

 

[Lola701]

For me a copy is a copy. Customization is customization. We don’t have to be hypocritical on things just because designers we love do those.
We all know by now that all designers copy. But we also know that there’s something a bit chaotic in the design process. A designer in one collection can reproduce an old garment (copy), customize an existing garment, design shapes and details, combine a new develop print, mix them and things like that.

The appreciation of a quality of a designer is totally personal then. It’s like the designers who sew and those who draws or drapes. A designer is not a seamstress. My grandmother was a seamstress and she was mezmerized by the ideas of designers. I design some of my clothes but I can’t sew them. I can’t say I’m a designer because I don’t have that structure.

Then the respect we have for a designer regarding his/her design process has a biais. It’s OK to have double standards. It’s ok for someone to appreciate Alexander McQueen copying and hate when Nicolas does it.
It’s almost like when Azzedine criticized Karl for not sewing while admiring YSL who operated exactly in the same way. Both drew but had enough technical knowledge to direct an atelier and have a total idea in how to construct their clothes.
And all three copied. Karl and Yves were more slick. They had enough knowledge of fashion that they could reproduce a Dior or Balenciaga silhouette without having the direct reference in front on them.

I personally hate when a copy doesn’t integrate in a design language of a designer and is nothing more than a copy. That’s my issue with people like Proenza Schouler, with Zuhair Murad or even with Virgil Abloh and others. At some point, it becomes too derivative that your work doesn’t mean anything. It shows a lack a substance.

 

[Caffeine]

That particular dress inspired by the 20s costume is a copy even if the material is upgraded he tends to not change historical comes much.

NG way of working is assemblage and at times he falls in love with a piece and does not change it so much other than fabrication or alt versions of it .

he is brilliant but he does have 1:1 copy moments, prada as well phoebe as well tom as well , this does not take away from there total vision unlike a ancora that just rifs of the latest miu miu and prada with no vision.

marc is much more open with his obsessions tom as well, where as NG tends to play wizard of OZ this part i like less of his way of dealing with his process ,and why you never seen also a documentary of his way of creating because its lots of pieces from all designers or pictures put in a blender.

i can tell you from my friend that work in his LV design office and seeing the process a few times and methods of working.
the studio is full of vintage designers liek all the others he just cuts part up and remix more via a sci fi lens retro future look.
one of his old balenciaga collection i found out but felt new was the one that actually came from one of the interns study on packaging which then got mixed in with other stuff.

often the audience is just not in the know of the multi references so it feels like its out of this world.

(instead of becoming more sharper with age and more bold and know when to restrain )
for me NG lost the plot his designs are now plan ugly over designed cosplay for a outdated sci fi movie never made and ego driven, i hope he changes course but i doubt it. (instead of becoming more sharper and more bold and know when to retrain )

its like the 70´s or 60´s idea of the future its looks comical now in 2025

I mean, the human shape has stayed pretty much the same for millions of years. Unless our lifestyle changes drastically, there are just so many things designers can work with

 

[PDFSD]

I mean, the human shape has stayed pretty much the same for millions of years. Unless our lifestyle changes drastically, there are just so many things designers can work with

your exactly pointing to the issue of lack of modernity, its not only about new shapes, the modernity is mostly to be had in material and technical aspects of construction to design.
why NG´s future looks so retro futuristic it plays with decor and stylistic choices based on retro future that's not an secret.

one would argue the future shows for a more streamlined and transformational evolution if your fanatic about futurism.

if people in the 60´s 70´s and 80´s could dream up a vision for a dream future a designer in 2025 should be able to dream of a future that goes beyond those predictions before.

its not about awaiting we grow 2 more hands etc in order to change silhouette its much more detailed.
but i don't want to go into this human evolutions as the point was in regards to design and material and vision in light of progress that is or seems futuristic as it seems beyond its years .

just to note :
Two million years ago, early humans, including species like Homo erectus, were undergoing significant evolutionary changes and expanding their range beyond Africa

• Eurasian Presence:
  Fossil evidence from Grăunceanu in Eurasia suggests that early humans were present there at least 1.95 million years ago, further demonstrating their expansion beyond Africa.
  
  
  
• Complex Evolutionary History:
  It's important to note that human evolution is not a linear progression, and multiple species of early humans existed and coexisted, with varying degrees of success.